Rajasthan High Court - Jaipur
The Jaipur Central Cooperative Bank Ltd vs Mulchand S/O Sh. Motiram Raigar on 29 November, 2018
Bench: Chief Justice, G R Moolchandani
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
(1) D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1224/2018
The Jaipur Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., F-1, Nursery Circle,
Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur Through Its Managing Director Through
Officer In Charge Case.
----Appellant
Versus
1. Mulchand S/o Sh. Motiram Raigar, R/o Vp Anandpura
(Chimanpura), Via Govind Garh, Teh.- Chomu, Distt.-
Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Registrar, Co-Operative Societies, Govt. Of Rajasthan,
Jaipur.
----Respondents
(2) D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1227/2018 The Jaipur Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., F-1, Nursery Circle, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur Through Its Managing Director Through Officer In Charge Case.
----Appellant Versus
1. Jodha Ram Jaat S/o Govind Ram Jaat, R/o Vp- Itawa, Bhopji, Teh.-Chomu, District Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Registrar, Co-Operative Socities, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
----Respondents (3) D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1228/2018 The Jaipur Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., F-1, Nursery Circle, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur Through Its Managing Director Through Officer In Charge Case.
----Appellant Versus
1. Subash Chand Dudi Son Of Shri Jhupan Ram Dudi, Aged About 57 Years, R/o Ward No. 13, Gram Roopan Ka Vaas, Post Chinchdoli, Via Babai, Tehsil Khetri, District (2 of 6) [SAW-1224/2018] Jhunjhunu, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Registrar, Co-Operative Socities, Govt. Of Rajasthan Jaipur.
----Respondents (4) D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1240/2018 The Jaipur Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., F-1, Nursery Circle, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur Through Its Managing Director Through Officer In Charge Case.
----Appellant Versus
1. Madan Lal Sharma S/o Sh. Lunkaran Sharma, R/o Village Bhimpura, Post-Rampura Unti, Via Bagaru, Jaipur, (Raj.)
2. The Registrar, Co-Operative Societies, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
----Respondents (5) D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1244/2018 The Jaipur Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., F-1, Nursery Circle, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur Through Its Managing Director Through Officer In Charge Case
----Appellant Versus
1. Puranmal Sharma S/o Sh. Murlidhar Sharma, Aged About 56 Years, R/o B-15, Arihant Kunj Vihar, Tonk Road, Chaksu, Jaipur (Raj.)
2. The Registrar, Co-Operative Societies, Govt. Of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
----Respondents (6) D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1223/2018 The Jaipur Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., F-1, Nursery Circle, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur through its Managing Director through officer in charge case.
Appellant/Respondent Versus
1. Narendra Kumar Sharma S/o Sh. Kedranath Sharma, age (3 of 6) [SAW-1224/2018] 60 years, R/o 46/223, Rajat Path, Mansarover, Jaipur (Raj.) Respondent/Petitioner
2. The Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
Respondent (7) D.B. Special Appeal Writ No. 1241/2018 The Jaipur Central Cooperative Bank Ltd., F-1, Nursery Circle, Vaishali Nagar, Jaipur through its Managing Director through officer in charge case.
Appellant/Respondent Versus
1. Om Prakash Sharma S/o Birdhichand Sharma, by caste Sharma, aged about 63 years, R/o Devgura, Vyaso Ka Mohalla, Via-Jahota, The Amer, Jaipur (Raj.) Respondent/Petitioner
2. The Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Govt. of Rajasthan, Jaipur.
Respondent For Appellant(s) : Mr. Ram Kumar Sharma For Respondent No.1 : Mr. Abhisar Bhanu with Mr. Sanjay Kapoor HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE G R MOOLCHANDANI Order 29/11/2018
1. The issue of Managers under different Primary Agriculture Credit Cooperative Societies appointed as Loan Supervisor has been decided by various Division Benches of this Court holding that it is a case of promotion and not direct recruitment. The issue arose on account of the fact that on being promoted as Loan Supervisors salaries were fixed of Managers less than the last drawn salary. The cooperative banks treated the appointment by way of direct recruitment. In that context the issue arose whether it was a case of appointment by promotion.
(4 of 6) [SAW-1224/2018] Consistent view taken by the Division Benches of this Court is that it is a case of promotion.
2. We are surprised that in spite of the Division Bench judgments being upheld by the Supreme Court in Petition for Special Leave to Appeal(C) No.10638/2018, Barmer Central Cooperative Bank Limited Vs. Bhanwar Singh Khinchi & Ors. being dismissed by the Supreme Court on 04.05.2018, the cooperative banks continue to litigate on the same issue.
3. The history of the various appeals decided have been noted in a decision dated 10.09.2018 in a batch of D.B. Civil Special Appeals(W), lead matter being D.B. Special Appeal(W) No.1472/2018, The Bhilwara Central Co-operative Bank Ltd. Vs. Balu Lal Sharma & Anr.. The decision reads as under:-
Applications under Section 5 of the Limitation Act:
1. For the reasons stated in the applications delay in filing the appeals is condoned. The applications are allowed.
Special Appeals (Writ):
1. Whether employee working as Manager in Primary Agriculture Credit Society, appointed as Loan Supervisor to a Central Cooperative Bank, is a case of appointment by promotion or direct recruitment has been the subject matter of an authoritative pronouncement by a learned Single Judge of this Court as also Division Bench of this Court. Dismissing a batch of Special Appeals (Writ), lead matter being D.B. Special Appeal (Writ) No.433/2017 on 18.07.2017, the Division Bench held as under:
"We have examined the nature of the appointments in question. It is not in dispute that at the relevant time, recruitment was made by the Bank as per order dated 09.03.2005 prescribing the mode of appointment to the post of Loan Supervisor inter alia. Clause (1) of the order dated 09.03.2005 prescribed that the educational qualification for direct recruitment as well as for promotion shall be as per Schedule A to C appended with the order. Clause (2) of the order referred above pertains to minimum and maximum age limit for appointment to different (5 of 6) [SAW-1224/2018] posts in different cadres of the appellant Bank. Suffice to mention that a higher maximum age limit is prescribed for the working staff with an additional relaxation of 5 years. Clause (3) of the order provides procedure for direct recruitment as well as for promotion. The order aforesaid also provides a mode to maintain seniority of the persons appointed by way of direct recruitment and by way of promotion. An important aspect of the matter is that clause (3) and (4) of the order aforesaid prescribes the constitution of Departmental Promotion Committee and the procedure that is to be followed by the Departmental Promotion Committee while considering case of a person for promotion. It is not in dispute that the appointments in question were made in accordance with the procedure laid down in the order dated 09.03.2005. The appellant in their reply to the writ petition quite specifically stated that the Registrar has laid down the service conditions under the order dated 09.03.2005 and that was adhered while making the appointments. It is also not in dispute that the respondent-petitioners were already working as Manager with different Primary Agriculture Credit Cooperative Societies and they were eligible to be considered for appointment to the post of Loan Supervisor by way of promotion as per the order dated 09.03.2005.
It is also pertinent to notice that the orders of appointment issued in favour of the respondent petitioners nowhere refers about the procedure that was to be adhered while making appointments through direct recruitment. No advertisement, which is necessary requirement to initiate the process of appointment through open market, too has been brought to our knowledge.
In this factual background, we are of considered opinion that learned Single Bench rightly arrived at the conclusion that the appointments were given to the respondent- petitioners by way of promotion as per the procedure given under the order dated 09.03.2005. The appeals, as such, are having no merit. Hence, dismissed."
2. Thereafter, D.B. Special Appeals (Writ) No.725/2017, 746/2017, 850/2017, 895/2017 and 896/2017 were dismissed by another Division Bench on 09.10.2017.
3. The effect of holding that it is a case of promotion requires last drawn salary as Manager in Primary Agriculture Credit Society to be protected. We find with (6 of 6) [SAW-1224/2018] reference to the impugned order dated 19.04.2018 challenged in D.B. Special Appeals (Writ) No.1472/2018, 1489/2014, 1494/2018, 1496/2018, 1515/2018, 1516/2018 and the order dated 12.04.2018 challenged in the other Special Appeals (Writ), that counsel for the appellants conceded that the issue was covered against the appellants by authoritative Division Bench judgments but still opposed the grant of the relief claimed by the writ petitioners. Now, if an issue is decided after interpreting the law, it would bind the department.
4. The appeals are accordingly dismissed."
4. The appeals are accordingly dismissed.
(G R MOOLCHANDANI),J (PRADEEP NANDRAJOG),CJ KKC/3 to 7 Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)